Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery & Division of Liver Transplantation, Department of Surgery, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, 102 Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, China.
Surg Endosc. 2018 Feb;32(2):971-976. doi: 10.1007/s00464-017-5774-8. Epub 2017 Aug 4.
We explored the difference in treatment efficacy of endoscopic self-expendable metal stent (SEMS) and surgical bypass (SB) in the management of malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) secondary to pancreatic cancer.
A retrospective analysis was conducted using consecutive patients who were admitted from 2008 to 2016 receiving either endoscopic SEMS or SB. Diagnosis other than pancreatic cancer and SEMS placement as a pre-operative drainage before Whipple's operation was excluded. Propensity score (PS) matching was performed to eliminate the confounding effect of heterogeneity between patients from two treatment groups. The rate of early, late treatment-related events, readmission and re-intervention, the duration of hospitalization, and the cost of treatment were compared.
There were 98 patients undergoing endoscopic SEMS or SB in the study period. The median age was 68.5 years and 52% of the patients had metastatic disease with median survival of 6 months. After 1:1 PS matching, 30 patients from each group were analyzed. The hospital stay was significantly longer in the SB group (13 vs. 5 days, P < 0.001) with a trend of higher rate of early treatment-related events (24.1 vs. 6.7%, P = 0.113). None of the patients in SB group developed recurrent biliary obstruction. Higher readmission rate (36.7 vs. 3.3%, P = 0.004) and re-intervention rate (36.7 vs. 10%, P = 0.033) were found in the SEMS group. The 3-, 6-, and 9-month re-intervention rates for endoscopic SEMS and SB group were 24.9, 29.4, 45.7, and 11.2, 11.2, and 11.2%, respectively (P = 0.03). When all subsequent readmissions were taken into account, there was no significant difference in hospital stay in both groups (7.5 vs. 14 days, P = 0.359); however, the total cost of treatment in SB group was significantly higher than that in the SEMS group (13,307 vs. 7113 USD, P = 0.035).
Despite being more invasive and expensive, surgical bypass provides durable relief of biliary obstruction. Endoscopic SEMS is associated with minimal procedural risks and low re-intervention rate, which are important considerations for frail patients with limited life expectancy.
我们探讨了内镜自膨式金属支架(SEMS)和手术旁路(SB)在治疗胰腺癌继发恶性胆道梗阻(MBO)中的疗效差异。
对 2008 年至 2016 年连续收治的接受内镜 SEMS 或 SB 治疗的患者进行回顾性分析。排除非胰腺癌诊断和 SB 作为胰十二指肠切除术前引流。采用倾向评分(PS)匹配消除两组患者之间混杂因素的影响。比较早期、晚期治疗相关事件、再入院和再介入、住院时间和治疗费用。
研究期间有 98 例患者行内镜 SEMS 或 SB 治疗。中位年龄为 68.5 岁,52%的患者有转移病灶,中位生存时间为 6 个月。1:1 PS 匹配后,每组各有 30 例患者进行分析。SB 组的住院时间明显更长(13 天 vs. 5 天,P<0.001),早期治疗相关事件的发生率也有升高趋势(24.1% vs. 6.7%,P=0.113)。SB 组无复发性胆道梗阻发生。SEMS 组再入院率(36.7% vs. 3.3%,P=0.004)和再介入率(36.7% vs. 10%,P=0.033)较高。内镜 SEMS 和 SB 组的 3、6 和 9 个月再介入率分别为 24.9%、29.4%、45.7%和 11.2%、11.2%和 11.2%(P=0.03)。当考虑所有后续再入院时,两组的住院时间无显著差异(7.5 天 vs. 14 天,P=0.359);然而,SB 组的治疗总费用明显高于 SEMS 组(13307 美元 vs. 7113 美元,P=0.035)。
尽管 SB 更具侵袭性和昂贵,但它提供了持久的胆道梗阻缓解。内镜 SEMS 具有最小的手术风险和较低的再介入率,这对于预期寿命有限的虚弱患者是重要的考虑因素。